Ballots to remain uncounted in MI and Stein blocked in Philly. Guest: Election integrity, law expert Paul Lehto says this proves 'only option is to get it right on Election Night'. Also: Trump taps climate denier, fossil-fuel tool for EPA...

Posting a more streamlined review on this holiday weekend to take advantage of the beautiful weather (while also dealing with some technology issues yet to be sorted out, so no added graphics)... Below you'll find the most notable of notable stories posted last week to The BRAD BLOG.

A quick review of the following will get you all caught up for whatever thunder will inevitably roll this coming week, as the cicadas crawl out of the ground after 17 years and the rest of us fire up the barbie and celebrate the unofficial start of summer...

In Maher's final show of the season (he'll return Aug. 24), he absolutely killed. This interview with Republican Presidential Candidate Ron Paul is one example, as were the final "New Rules" of the season which I'll also try post here soon (UPDATE: "New Rules" video now posted here)...

Post-script: Democrats may wish to pay very close attention to the reception Paul received from Maher's quite liberal studio audience.

On Monday May 21st, The BRAD BLOG reported that the Bush Administration's military pay plan for 2008 was not in compliance with a key statute in the 1999 Defense Authorization Act. The Act, which went into effect in 2000, required annual pay raises for military personnel to be based on a figure called the Employment Cost Index (ECI), plus an additional 0.5% raise.

The Administration's proposed pay raise for 2007 is 3%, less than both the ECI increase according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (3.3%) and the traditional ECI + 0.5% figure, which would be equal to 3.8%. The BRAD BLOG had reported that by seeking to deny the additional 0.5% pay increase, the Administration would be breaking the law.

Further reporting, however, has revealed that our original report was actually incorrect in regards to the plan's illegality. At least based on the provision we had originally reported on. We have now determined that the Administration's plan would not break that part of the 1999 law because of obscure language in the 700 page Defense Authorization Act that fails to extend the 0.5% pay formula to fiscal year 2008.

The error was discovered while doing research for a follow-up to my original report.

Had the Administration offered its new plan in previous years, it would have been illegal. However, members of Congress from both sides of the aisle are now seeking to re-authorize the previous plan, which would make the Bush plan, as we reported previously, illegal once again under the new provisions.

As well, despite the expiration of the ECI + 0.5% measure, the Administration's proposal for a salary increase may still be illegal under the 1999 Defense Authorization Act...

Takin' it easy today (at least as far as you know) after a brutally exhausting and often dispiriting week. Whether or not that led to a different mood today during my weekly guest appearance on the Peter B. Collins Show I can't tell you.

Either way, as Guest Hosted today by our friend Tony Trupiano, we covered a few things I haven't gotten to speak much about lately, and also received an important good news update from caller "Chris in Salinas." Turns out action taken by Chris over the past week, after finding something troubling in a recent special election in Monterey County, CA, has led to a happy conclusion that will effect all voters in Monterey, and perhaps across this entire state.

That story --- and much else of what we chatted about on the show --- again, underscores the need for citizens to take control of their democracy because it will not be either the media or the government who restores our country. It will be you.

UPDATE: "Chris from Salinas" writes in to comments below with more details on precisely what happened in Monterey County, the action he took, and the changes that were made because of. Useful if you haven't been able to listen to the audio above (which I still recommend, in any case).

Today is a hodge-podge of news and editorials. More on the for or against discussion of HR-811 and today Senator Feinstein announced the filing of her version of Holt’s bill. We also have editorials from two Utah papers that, of course, like HAVA just the way it is and more on the New Jersey lawsuit. All of those stories and more, are linked below.

Other than all of that, this is it for a week. The ‘Daily Voting News” staff (me) is taking a well deserved vacation. See you next Friday...

While it served, for me at least, as a reminder of his very good humor --- which I always found him to have, even when he was, in my opinion, tarred by opponents/media as being stiff, wooden, and humorless --- it also served to remind that he's still Al Gore. Meaning, he still describes everything as if he's speaking to first-graders, which, although also opportunistically used against him by opponents, is still an issue available to them should he decide to run again. As are most things such folks used against him in the past. Just to keep that in mind.

But with Democrats sure to take a well-deserved pummeling for their ill-considered capitulation to Bush over Iraq War funding, the choices currently available to Democrats for 2008 remain grim indeed, even if some consolation can be taken from a John Edwards statement yesterday in which he said, "After tonight, one thing is now perfectly clear: No one else is going to end this war for us. Bush will not listen. Congress will not fight. There's no one left to lead the country now but we the people."

Then again, those are just words in an email to supporters. So with that said, here's today's question:

For the first time in over four years of putting out “Daily Voting News” with only a one or two day break ‘DVN’ is going on a hiatus beginning after tomorrow’s edition and for a week. We will be back on Friday, June 1.

The Texas Voter ID bill has gone down in flames in and my new hero, State Senator Mario Gallegos has returned to be under his doctor’s care. Gallegos said, “"It's time to go home and do what the doctors tell me. It's something that had to be done. If I hadn't been here, they would have passed it."

Meanwhile US Senate Minority Leader, Mitch McConnell has submitted an amendment to the immigration bill presently being heard in the Senate that would do the very thing that Senator Gallegos risked his health to stop.

Un-believable. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has introduced an amendment to the proposed new Immigration Law that would require disenfranchising Photo ID restrictions on voters at the polling place, according to a press release just out from National League of Women Voters.

The provision tagged onto the immigration bill would amend the horrible Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 that McConnell co-sponsored and pushed through to passage along with his Republican counterpart and lead author in the House, the now-jailed Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) and Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT) and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD).

The key provision in the amendment is as follows:

SEC. 304. IDENTIFICATION OF VOTERS AT THE POLLS.

(a) In General.--Notwithstanding the requirements of section 303(b), each State shall require individuals casting ballots in an election for Federal office in person to present a current valid photo identification issued by a governmental entity before voting.

(b) Effective Date.--Each State shall be required to comply with the requirements of subsection (a) on and after January 1, 2008.

Apparently, it's not enough for the Republican White House operatives to create phony "grass roots" groups to create propaganda solely for the purpose of forwarding the fraudulent notion of a massive "Democratic Voter Fraud" epidemic (which doesn't exist).

It's not enough to toss legitimate voters from the voter rolls through purges and "caging" lists to remove legal, minority voters (many serving overseas in Iraq, nonetheless) so they are not allowed to exercise their legal franchise.

No. Come hell or highwater, these democracy hating Republican thugs are going to find a way to keep you from voting --- even if they have to amend every piece of legislation that comes before them to try and do it --- because, otherwise, they can't win elections.

If McConnell's provision is not defeated, fillibustered, or whatever it takes by every goddamned Democrat in that body, well....good luck voting them out of office either. But they'll sure as hell deserve it. Every. Single. One of them. (As if those who pushed through the Iraq funding bill capitulation don't already deserve to be removed from office.)

These Republicans are absolutely beyond contempt and, clearly, despise the most basic American values at the very core of our once-great Republic. They hate everything about it. They are loathesome. And the Dems damned well better stop them dead in their tracks.

This Monica revealed something hotter --- much hotter --- than a stained blue dress. In her opening testimony yesterday before the House Judiciary Committee, Monica Goodling, the blonde-ling underling to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and Department of Justice Liaison to the White House, dropped The Big One....And the Committee members didn't even know it.

The perplexed committee members hadn't a clue --- and asked no substantive questions about it thereafter. Karl Rove is still smiling. If the members had gotten the clue, and asked the right questions, they would have found "the keys to the kingdom," they thought they were looking for. They dangled right in front of their perplexed faces.

The keys: the missing emails --- and missing link --- that could send Griffin and his boss, Rove, to the slammer for a long, long time.

Kingdom enough for ya?

But what's 'caging' and why is it such a dreadful secret that lawyer McNulty put his license to practice and his freedom on the line to cover Tim Griffin's involvement in it? Because it's a felony. And a big one.

Here's how caging worked, and along with Griffin's thoughtful emails themselves you'll understand it all in no time.

The Bush-Cheney operatives sent hundreds of thousands of letters marked "Do not forward" to voters' homes. Letters returned ("caged") were used as evidence to block these voters' right to cast a ballot on grounds they were registered at phony addresses. Who were the evil fakers? Homeless men, students on vacation and --- you got to love this --- American soldiers. Oh yeah: most of them are Black voters.

Why weren't these African-American voters home when the Republican letters arrived? The homeless men were on park benches, the students were on vacation --- and the soldiers were overseas. Go to Baghdad, lose your vote. Mission Accomplished.

Poor Monica Goodling. Poor, poor Monica. Oh, the indignity of it all --- having to testify before the House Judiciary Committee and all. With Immunity.

She may have violated laws but she didn't mean to. I guess it's all better now. And clearly Committee members agreed --- practically falling all over her with apologies for having been brought forth to testify. Goodling, the former Department of Justice's liaison to the White House and senior counselor to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, was granted immunity from prosecution during testimony regarding the White House's role in the firing of eight U.S. attorneys. And while she was the liaison to the White House, Goodling asserted that she did not "hold the keys to the kingdom" as some have suggested.

The first three hours of testimony shed little light on the plan to remove the USA's. Although Goodling did say she believed Deputy Chief of Staff Kyle Sampson and Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty had delivered inaccurate testimony before Congress. In particular, Goodling said, McNulty had not been forthcoming about newly appointed Arkansas US Attorney Tim Griffin's use of vote caging lists.

Goodling testified that there were "problems with her historic memory" and agreed that the firings should have been handled differently. She believed the USA's in question should have been given a chance to learn about their performance and given an opportunity to improve. Goodling believed the firings should have been done in person, noting "it was the right thing to do."

Goodling recounted a November 27, 2006 meeting she attended concerning the firing of Nevada US Attorney Daniel Bogden. She said the general consensus was that the Justice Department could do better than Bogden, noting, "good people needed to be put in those spots." Goodling said Gonzales agreed to use a provision within the Patriot Act to axe Bogden. Funny, Gonzales has sworn up and down he doesn't even remember attending the meeting. Regardless, Bogden, an Independent, was not the man for the job, despite the fact that he served the Department for more than sixteen years.

The Nevada US Attorney, testifying before a House Judiciary Subcommittee on March 6, 2007, recounted what Associate Deputy Attorney General William Mercer had told him the reason for his dismissal, was so that the United States Department of Justice could do it's job for the American people...by helping to build the resume of all of their close friends...

Against his doctor's advice, a stooped and feeble Sen. Mario Gallegos arrives at the state Capitol each day, just to make sure the Senate does not take up a bill that would require voters to produce ID at the polls. And when the rigors of the job start to wear on the Houston Democrat, whose body is rejecting a liver transplanted four months ago, he retires to a hospital-style bed — donated by a Republican colleague — in a room next to the Senate chamber. From there, he can be summoned at a moment's notice should his vote be needed. In a life-and-death drama playing out under the Capitol dome, Gallegos is putting his health at risk to block a measure that he and others say could prevent many minorities and the elderly from taking part in elections in Texas.

I’ve mentioned Senator Gallegos here a couple of times now. Texas law requires that two-thirds of the State Senators must agree before a bill can come to the floor for debate. The Democrats have just enough members to block the bill. The bill now appears to be in trouble because the bill must come to the floor by midnight tonight in order to be considered. Senator Gallegos is a true hero.

ADDITIONAL THOUGHT FROM BRAD: The Gallegos story is extraordinary. A must read. I don't have anything substantive to add, but I just wanted to underscore John's thoughts on what a champion this man is. For both Texas and America.

More on that mess in Texas, and many other voting news stories of note today, all linked below...

Despite my and others' best efforts, [Deputy Attorney General, Paul McNulty]'s public testimony was incomplete or inaccurate in a number of respects. As explained in more detail in my written remarks, I believe that the Deputy was not fully candid about his knowledge of White House involvement in the replacement decision, failed to disclose that he had some knowledge of the White House's interest in selecting Tim Griffin as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, inaccurately described the Department's internal assessment of the Parsky Commission, and failed to disclose that he had some knowledge of allegations that Tim Griffin had been involved in vote "caging" during his work on the President's 2004 campaign.

For the record, it's the practice of sending registered mail to minority voters, asking for a reply, and if one doesn't come back, the voter's right to vote is challenged either at the polls, or attempts are made to remove them from the voter rolls --- usually without their knowledge. Allegations have been made that this was done, based on race, in 2004, when registered letters were sent to the home addresses of African-Americans in Ohio, Florida and elsewhere. Most insidiously, letters were said to have been sent to U.S. troops who were away, serving in Iraq or Afghanistan, and thus did not (and could not) answer the registered mail. Their registrations were then reportedly challenged.

The RNC agreed to cease the practice in a 1986 consent decree in a court case brought after they had "tried to have 31,000 voters, most of them black, removed from the rolls in Louisiana when a party mailer was returned, " according to the Washington Post.

"The consent decrees that resulted prohibited the party from engaging in anti-fraud initiatives that target minorities or conduct mail campaigns to 'compile voter challenge lists.'"

Hopefully one of the Judiciary Committee Members will follow up on this, with either Goodling or in further interviews with McNulty or Griffin, who was Karl Rove's aide at the time, before he was later shoved into Bud Cummins' position as Arkansas U.S. Attorney.

UPDATE 2:45pm PT: The DoJ released a statement this afternoon from McNulty, in response to Goodling's testimony and her claims that his "public testimony was incomplete or inaccurate in a number of respects":

"I testified truthfully at the Feb. 6, 2007, hearing based on what I knew at that time. Ms. Goodling's characterization of my testimony is wrong and not supported by the extensive record of documents and testimony already provided to Congress."

New Mexico's fired U.S. Attorney David Iglesias op-eds in today's LA Times on Gonzeles et al. in advance of this morning's testimony by Monica Goodling:

WHAT HAPPENS in a presidential administration when loyalty, to borrow a phrase from "Star Trek," becomes the "prime directive"? What happens when its all-encompassing fog obscures all other values — such as fealty to the Constitution, the rule of law or simple humanity?
...
What has become clear already is that the "loyalty uber alles" mentality has infected a wide swath of the Bush administration. Simple notions like right and wrong are, in their eyes, matters of allegiance, not conscience.
...
Loyalty is a virtue with limits. That was one of the many hard lessons from Watergate. In that scandal, some of President Nixon's staffers carried their loyalty to the president all the way to federal prison.

Monica Goodling, the DoJ liason to the White House, will testify, with immunity, tomorrow morning (Wed.) at 10:15am ET in front of the House Judiciary Committee. These early morning hearings are brutal for those of us bloggers on the West Coast, but we'd hate to miss this one.

Goodling broke down in tears on the morning the U.S. Attorney Purge scandal broke, and has copped the 5th, refusing to testify until given immunity. Why? We don't yet know exactly, but may find out tomorrow.

Career DoJ official David Margolis told Congressional investigators about her crying jag, and said, "I knew she must think everything was unraveling. And, you know, she was right about that."

TPMMuck has more from Margolis's deposition and on what we might expect in the morning. If you're watching, feel free to give us your thoughts in comments as things progress. Especially if she starts crying again. (Anyone want to wager on that?)

Came across this rather amusing House floor "Procedure Off" from last January between Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and pal/boss/roommate of vote fraudsters Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC). BlogActive's Mike Rogers, who pointed us to the video in his report on McHenry and his many questionably registered roomies, describes it as "priceless." We'll concur, and add that it's worthy of a quick viewing in exchange for at least a few chuckles...